'His claim is bogus': Internet backs Jack Smith as he urges court to reject Trump's immunity argument

WASHINGTON, DC: Filing his opening brief in front of DC's federal court of appeals, Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith insisted on rejecting Donald Trump's presidential immunity argument in his involvement in overturning the 2020 election result, reported CBS News.

The 82-page court document was filed on Saturday, December 30. In the opening paragraph of the filing shared by Fox News, disputing the former president's claims "wrong", Smith stated, "In response, the defendant claims that to protect the institution of the Presidency, he must be cloaked with absolute immunity from criminal prosecution unless the House impeached and the Senate convicted him for the same conduct. He is wrong."

The Special Counsel emphasized Trump's actions, which involved attempting to stay in power after losing an election, violated principles of separation of powers, constitutional text, historical context, and precedent. A

According to those principles, a former president should be prosecuted for any criminal acts in office.

The filing came a day after the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the former president was not immune from the January 6 civil suit brought by a group of US Capitol Police officers.

Donald Trump's immunity claims threaten democracy, says Jack Smith

Jack Smith slammed Donald Trump's arguments of "presidential immunity" and reminded the court if it is upheld, it will threaten the nation's democracy.

"It is the defendant's claim that he cannot be held to answer for the charges that he engaged in an unprecedented effort to retain power through criminal means, despite having lost the election, that threatens the democratic and constitutional foundation of our Republic," he said in the filing. 

The filing also accused Trump of "conspir[ing] to use knowingly false claims of election fraud with the goal of overturning the legitimate results of that election and disenfranchising millions of voters."

"For the foregoing reasons, the Court should affirm the district court's order denying the defendant's motions to dismiss on Presidential immunity and double-jeopardy grounds," read Smith's filing.

Trump, dominating the opinion polls among his GOP presidential contenders, has been demanding complete immunity despite having 91 felony charges against him.

Recently, the White House hopeful also urged the SCOTUS to deny Smith's request for a speedy immunity review and, in another instance, attacked the latter for persisting with the case despite a DC court order temporarily halting the proceedings.

The special counsel's filing comes amid Trump's new primary ballot disqualification from Maine, creating more roadblocks to his dream of entering the Oval Office for a second term.

Internet back Jack Smith and slam Donald Trump

Netizens do not want anyone to be above the Constitution and law. Donald Trump's claims have shocked some users on social media, and they believe if granted immunity, it will go against the country's foundations.

One user remarked, "I always thought no one was supposed to be above the law in this country and Trump’s immunity arguments have shocked me."

Another user said, "Immunity for DJT will normalize “some people are above the law”. Founders would NOT go for this!"

"Why even ask for immunity? If the truth speaks for itself, then his case(s) defense(s) should be rock solid, right? Can’t argue with facts. I thought he said he’s an undefeated fighter. Here is where he can prove it unequivocally," added a third user.

A fourth user stated, "His claim of immunity first of all is bogus. No Person no matter the office that is trying to overthrow the government to stay in power. That is the highest crime one could commit & absolutely no one should have any type of immunity for that very crime. He is not above our laws."

"Urgent that this is understood for our democracy to survive. trumP is no better than YOU or me," read one reaction.

Another added, "We must stay true to 'no man is above the'… The founders would not go for this immunity."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.